這起案件結合「政界名人」與「金融詐騙集團」的複雜關係，被視為台灣司法史上極具代表性的政商勾結案例之一。核心圍繞在「全民電訊（全民電通）」掏空案與未上市股票非法販售，其關鍵人物為 張俊宏 與 楊順隆。

整體事件的開端，來自當時電信自由化浪潮所帶來的商機。張俊宏身為政界重量級人物，創立「全民電訊」，對外描繪一個充滿前景的電信事業藍圖。然而，企業在發展初期需要大量資金支持，這使他開始尋求外部資金來源。另一方面，楊順隆所領導的「全球統一集團」，則擁有龐大的業務銷售網絡，專門從事未上市股票的推銷與資金募集。兩者的結合，形成了一種典型的「政商互補」模式：一方提供名聲與願景，另一方負責銷售與資金回收。

在實際操作上，這套模式運作得相當直接卻也極具欺騙性。楊順隆的業務團隊以張俊宏的名號為背書，向一般投資人推銷「全民電訊」的未上市股票，強調公司即將上市，並暗示有政治人物加持、風險極低。這些股票往往以遠高於實際價值的價格出售，投資人被高報酬預期吸引而投入資金。然而，這些資金並未完全用於企業發展。根據後續司法調查，張俊宏涉及透過多層轉投資與關係企業，將公司資金挪作他用，甚至流入私人用途，形成典型的掏空行為。

這起案件最終在 2000 年前後爆發，震動社會。張俊宏因掏空公司資產與違法交易，被判處有期徒刑 5 年 7 個月，並曾長期逃亡，直到 2014 年才投案入獄，之後歷經假釋與再入獄等程序。楊順隆則因其主導的吸金行為，涉及金額高達數十億元新台幣，被依違反證券交易法等罪判刑 5 年 8 個月。值得注意的是，楊順隆在出獄後仍多次被懷疑涉及新一輪詐騙活動，顯示此類犯罪具有高度再犯性。

之所以這個案例會被反覆提及，是因為它完整呈現詐騙結構中的幾個關鍵元素：首先是「名人背書」，利用公眾對政治人物的信任降低戒心；其次是「組織化銷售」，透過大規模業務團隊進行高壓推銷；最後則是「價值虛化」，投資人最終持有的股票隨著公司倒閉而失去價值，形同廢紙。

這種模式在今天其實並沒有消失，只是換了形式，例如轉向虛擬貨幣、未公開募資或各種「內線投資機會」。只要同時出現「名人加持」、「未上市」、「保證高報酬」這幾個關鍵字，就應該高度警惕，因為背後的邏輯往往與當年的案件如出一轍。

This case is a complex example of political and financial collusion, widely regarded as one of the most notable scandals in Taiwan’s legal history. It centers on the “Global Unity Telecommunications (Quanmin Telecom)” asset-stripping case and illegal trading of unlisted stocks, involving key figures 張俊宏 and 楊順隆.

The origin of the incident can be traced back to the wave of telecommunications liberalization and the capital demands of emerging telecom ventures. At the time, Chang Chun-hung, a prominent political figure, founded “Quanmin Telecom” and promoted it as a high-potential enterprise aiming to enter the telecommunications market. However, the company required substantial funding for development. Meanwhile, Yang Shun-long, who led the “Global Unity Group,” controlled a large-scale sales network specializing in unlisted stock promotion and fundraising.

Their cooperation formed a typical “political–business synergy”: one side provided credibility and vision, while the other provided sales execution and capital collection capability.

In practice, the operation relied heavily on misleading marketing. Yang’s sales teams used Chang Chun-hung’s political reputation to promote Quanmin Telecom’s unlisted shares, claiming the company was close to listing and implying strong political backing and low investment risk. These shares were sold at prices far above their actual value, driven by promises of high returns. Investors were encouraged to buy in quickly under the belief that an IPO would soon multiply their investment.

However, investigations later revealed that a significant portion of the raised funds was not used for legitimate business expansion. Instead, Chang Chun-hung was accused of diverting company assets through complex investment structures and affiliated shell companies, effectively engaging in asset stripping and misappropriation.

The scandal surfaced in the early 2000s and caused major public shock. Chang Chun-hung was eventually sentenced to 5 years and 7 months in prison for embezzlement and illegal financial activities. He spent a long period evading arrest and only surrendered in 2014, later serving time intermittently due to parole and related cases. Yang Shun-long was also convicted under securities laws for fraudulent fundraising, with total illicit gains estimated in the billions of New Taiwan Dollars, and was sentenced to 5 years and 8 months.

Notably, after his release, Yang was repeatedly suspected of returning to similar fraudulent schemes, highlighting the high recidivism common in this type of financial crime.

This case is frequently cited because it clearly demonstrates the core structure of large-scale investment fraud: first, the use of celebrity or political endorsement to build trust; second, organized aggressive sales networks; and third, the creation of “worthless equity,” where investors ultimately hold shares that collapse into zero value after the company’s failure or asset stripping.

Although the format has evolved today—shifting toward cryptocurrency schemes, private placements, and “exclusive investment opportunities”—the underlying logic remains similar. Any offer involving “unlisted shares,” “guaranteed high returns,” and “insider opportunities” should be treated with extreme caution, as it often follows the same historical pattern.